Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 March 5

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

March 5[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on March 5, 2015.

Template:User left[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was retarget to Template:Not around. --BDD (talk) 13:36, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

should be deleted since this is not a userbox. Frietjes (talk) 22:57, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak delete - no links, no transclusions, clearly not a userbox and has never been a template. However, could possibly retarget to {{retired}} or {{not around}} (as in, this user has left). But since nobody's using it this way we might as well delete. Ivanvector (talk) 00:24, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, after reading it, I think that retarget to Template:Not around is better. That template starts with "This user may have left Wikipedia", and this could be a valid alternate. Ivanvector (talk) 00:44, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I was going to agree, since there is an informal convention that templates that start with "User" are userboxen, but there are many exceptions: {{user inactive}}, {{user longterm inactive}}, {{user stress}}, {{user health inactive}}, and so on. Given that, I prefer "not here" as a target: that's for users who have left, versus EX-WP which is for users who may leave. Ivanvector (talk) 01:04, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Ciervist Conservatives[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was retarget to Juan de la Cierva y Peñafiel. --BDD (talk) 13:33, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Inter-language soft redirects are not generally considered useful. TexasAndroid (talk) 19:56, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like a great solution to me. :) - TexasAndroid (talk) 21:07, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Just a note: we also have Juan de la Cierva about the inventor of the autogyro, a different person alive around the same time. Some of our articles pipe "Ciervist Conservatives" to his bio, but this seems to be incorrect. Pointing this out because it is obviously possible that I'm wrong. Ivanvector (talk) 21:49, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Just a follow-up note: Spanish Wikipedia pipes "Conservadores de Juan de la Cierva" and "Ciervistas" to es:Juan de la Cierva y Peñafiel in multiple places, so we can ignore my earlier note. Ivanvector (talk) 00:49, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I'm happy to start doing the fiddly bits (infoboxes etc) for the TR from ES to EN, and mark up as such... but my Spanish is a bit rusty. would be cool to work on it together. I'll do the fiddly bits but the running text will need a damned good CE. Si Trew (talk) 08:44, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have made a start and marked it as tr. es. I am guessing I have made a lot of mistakes in the tr. but it is starting to look all right, but certainly will need @Ivanvector:'s eyes over it once I've done the first pass. The English I think is not too bad but if I have made mistakes in the tr. that would be really bad.
I don't think quite yet it can go from here as converted to article, because it's the R not the target we're discussing here. I plug on. I did dput {{uc}} and so on, I have to do militiaman next, and as I said above, I'll do the scaffolding if Ivanvector does the mortar. So I am just trying to get it into a state where Ivan can go oh dear that is wrong, but at least knows why or how it is wrong etc rather than him having to do the scaffolding. I have militian and something else left and added a ref and checked the bios but the infobox is well at least we have one, but not great, but I marked for {{translated page}} with the versions, so the proposed target is fine but the R stands, unfortunately, because his dad was also cierva and it might be genuinely ambig in Eng. I'd never heard of him and I know something about the Spanish civil war... not much... but from the Red Book Club mostly. Si Trew (talk) 10:06, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I meant Left Book Club. Si Trew (talk) 02:02, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Eginyn[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete per nominator. What an incredible amount of discussion over such a non-controversial matter. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:45, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Inter-language soft redirects are not generally considered useful. TexasAndroid (talk) 19:34, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That is the way some pages are linked on Wikipedia; if there is not an article in the article's language, a redirect to an article in another language is created; take, for example, the link entitled Tramway d'Aubagne in the France table at Free public transport#Europe. <<< SOME GADGET GEEK >>> (talk) 19:41, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
From Wikipedia:Soft redirect:
"Soft redirects to non-English language editions of Wikipedia should be avoided because they will generally be unhelpful to English-language readers." - TexasAndroid (talk) 19:53, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - this appears to be the Welsh Wikipedia's version of WP:STUB, thus not only an interlanguage redirect, but also a cross-namespace redirect out of main space. Has no incoming links other than those created by this discussion, so I can't even figure out what its purpose is. If it's targeting to that wiki's project space unintentionally and could otherwise target to the Welsh stub article (cy:Eginyn?) then delete because it's not a topic with an especially Welsh importance. Ivanvector (talk) 20:13, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete The guidelines frown on this. With respect to Gadget Geek's comment, this is different from an interwiki link within an article's text, though I haven't looked into what the guidelines say about those. If the rationale were that there were articles here with redlinks pointing to Eginyn, it would be better, actually, to leave it as a redlink so people would know that the article was prime for being created, rather than obscuring that fact. —Largo Plazo (talk) 22:36, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like to help, but I'm not sure what it is you want to do. Are you creating a link from an English page to the Welsh article cy:Eginyn? If so, the proper code is {{ill|cy|English title|Welsh title}} which will display English title [cy]. It's meant to be temporary while an English article is created. In your case, {{ill|cy|Stub|Eginyn}} displays Stub, because we already have an English article on stubs. If you meant to create a cross-language redirect, we most often don't keep those unless the topic is significant in the foreign language. For example, Deutsche Demokratische Republik redirects to East Germany, because that German name is obviously relevant to English readers for that topic. I don't understand the English-language significance of the Welsh word for stubs, but it's entirely possible I'm just not seeing it. Or that it's a different word and Google Translate has failed me again. Ivanvector (talk) 00:40, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I intend to redirect to the Welsh page cy:Eginyn, that is right. Just want to make it convenient for Welsh users who inadvertently navigate to the English site and could not find what they were looking for. <<< SOME GADGET GEEK >>> (talk) 01:44, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
How would Welsh users accidentally find themselves on the English Wikipedia site if they're searching for a word that isn't here? And why for that one word? —Largo Plazo (talk) 02:10, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The proper way is to make an interlanguage link. Go to the English language page you want to add a link from, then on the left side menu, at the bottom, is a list of links to content on other language Wikipedias, and at the bottom is a link to "edit links". That takes you to Wikidata. There, on the right, is a section with links to other language Wikipedias. If you click the [edit] link beside that, you can add one for the Welsh Wikipedia. The detailed instructions are at Help:Interlanguage links#Adding a new link. I can do it for you if you like, if you let me know which English page you want to create a link from. I only just learned about this today myself; I had been going to each individual wiki and adding local links, but that method is no longer recommended. Ivanvector (talk) 02:54, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That does not work: I get a Link with page dialog, enter cywiki in the Language box, and Eginyn in the Page box, but clicking the Link with page button returns this generic pop-up message:

The page you wanted to link with is already attached to an item on the central data repository which links to Wikipedia:Stub on this site. Items can only have one page per site attached. Please choose a different page to link with.

The corresponding Wikidata entry already has cy:Wicipedia:Eginyn linked to it. But that is not the same page as cy:Eginyn. And besides, I want this page here (Eginyn) to automatically redirect to cy:Eginyn without going through a soft redirect; i.e. a hard redirect. And it seems that is not possible. Any solutions? <<< SOME GADGET GEEK >>> (talk) 04:06, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) You're looking at the Wikidata page for Project:Stub, which is our internal project page on guidelines for very short articles, not an article about the subject of stubs, and yes, that link already exists and appears to correctly link to cy:Wicipedia:Eginyn. I think that you need to start from Stub (not Project:Stub or Wikipedia:Stub) to create the link you want. Although now I see that someone has made cy:Eginyn into a redirect to cy:Wicipedia:Eginyn, so I'm confused. You're right that hard redirects to other Wikipedias are disabled; I don't remember why but they break things. And like other users have said, creating soft redirects to other languages is discouraged because this Wikipedia is meant to be for English readers, and the vast majority of English readers won't have any reason to look for eginyn. If we didn't have this criteria, it's easily conceivable that we could have a redirect here from every word in every language, and it would make the project extremely large and unstable. Ivanvector (talk) 05:05, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nevetheless, it is a WP-space essay, which means it has support in the community. We have deleted many redirects for WP:RF reasons, which XNR is an elucidation of (it is content that is not encyclopedic information, but administrative information, therefore is not information that should be accessible form the mainspace as it is not information for the readership, it is information for Welsh editorship (which isn't applicable on English wikipedia)). Further, it's non-English content, so not readable to our target audience (those that read English) even if some percentage of them read Welsh (as it is not information about English wikipedia). -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 04:49, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
But don't all Wikipedias follow the same general guidelines for articles? Where do the rules for cy:Wicipedia:Eginyn, when translated, differ from Wikipedia:Stub? They're just the same. It makes it easier to find. <<< SOME GADGET GEEK >>> (talk) 01:30, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It's not in English, therefore if existing on English wikipedia would be a speedy deletion event, so the redirect is insupportable. Further, guidelines for stubs are not reader content, so even on English wikipedia, it is not something for the general Wikipedia reader even if it were in English. -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 04:01, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
But it's always good to link to other wikis. That way everything would be accessible from each other - that is why wiki links, specifically cross-wiki links, exist. Why not? <<< SOME GADGET GEEK >>> (talk) 00:20, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
In my opinion, it isn't good for people to keep finding themselves on pages that they can't read. That's why we have separate Wikipedias. And you still haven't answered my question about how you imagine a Welsh speaker searching for a Welsh word that doesn't exist on English Wikipedia would "inadvertently" find himself on English Wikipedia and in need of a redirect to Welsh Wikipedia. —Largo Plazo (talk) 01:43, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Because the word "Eginyn" appears in the English Wiktionary and that is why it needs a English Wikipedia article to link to it. <<< SOME GADGET GEEK >>> (talk) 03:59, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No, the guidelines and styles are not the same across the different language Wikipedias; they're often similar but they're not required to be, and the English Wikipedia community generally has no input over guidelines in the other languages. An editor creating content on English Wikipedia should follow the English guideline. If we were to create a link from English Wikipedia using the Welsh language for stubs, it should still point to English Wikipedia's WP:STUB because that's the guideline we use here. Ivanvector (talk) 13:33, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Then should the page redirect to WP:Stub in the English Wikipedia rather than at Wicipedia in Welsh? <<< SOME GADGET GEEK >>> (talk) 14:10, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NOTDICT Wikipedia is not a dictionary. English Wikipedia is in English, not Welsh. -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 02:41, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not linking to Wiktionary. I'm linking to WP:STUB instead. <<< SOME GADGET GEEK >>> (talk) 23:15, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Inter-wiki, foreign language, cross-name space redirect with no policy based or even well reasoned argument for keeping it from the creator. Jbh (talk) 23:34, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Not any more. Keep. <<< SOME GADGET GEEK >>> (talk) 23:48, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
And.... now it is just a cross name space redirect. CSD R2 Jbh (talk) 00:30, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well, at least that's better than a inter-wiki, foreign language, cross-name space redirect. "Eginyn" means Stub in Welsh, as before, so the WP:STUB article should be relevant as it does on Welsh Wikipedia. <<< SOME GADGET GEEK >>> (talk) 01:52, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Warfare[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was Speedy close starting a RfD discussion concerning an article (now a redirect) which has been around since 2002 with no clear goal doesn't seem like an efficient process, especially as there's no likelihood that this will be deleted. Please either come back with a concrete proposal or, better still, discuss this on a central noticeboard such as WT:MILHIST. Nick-D (talk) 09:46, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have just restored this redirect as the conclusion of a merge discussion. On reflection, based on the content of the former article, I am not sure that War is the best target. For example outline of war lists the points that were included in the former warfare article. "Warfare" of course is the conduct or operation of war, but the article we had was really not much more than a point-form list, which we already have at the outline article. Without a better target I am in favour of keeping this, but I'm opening this up to get more opinions. Ivanvector (talk) 18:59, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep WP:MAD edit history needs to be kept around -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 05:00, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: some possible (unlikely) retargets. I think that there is a subtlety between "war" and "warfare": that the latter means more how war is conducted than war itself.
art of war → The Art of War (and other caps) would seem a long shot to an Ancient Chinese text on the subject, and no intention to suggest that, but:
Conduct of war → Law of war .
Make war red, but Make War → Lifted or The Story is in the Soil, Keep Your Ear to the Ground, album on which it is track 9.
On the whole I think it better to keep as suggested above, but I am quite happy to scout for suggestions too... perhaps inform WT:MILHIST? Si Trew (talk) 08:32, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.
  • I have listed at WT:MILHIST referring back to here. The speedy close was somewhat abrupt, and without consensus. Si Trew (talk) 01:45, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

List of Pakistani films of 2016[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. --BDD (talk) 13:31, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary redirect. No films for this page so why need a redirect? UBStalk 09:19, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My wrong caps on Films there. (lc but no uc). So we don't have {{R from alternative capitalization}} for many of these. The plot thins... Si Trew (talk) 01:55, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I created that redirect when I saw your redlink, it seemed like a good idea, although I didn't notice the F in Films. Siuenti (talk) 23:44, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for that, Suienti. Thanks for all your hard work at WP, I appreciate it, but have trouble saying so well. Si Trew (talk) 19:57, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2015_March_5&oldid=1138580506"